THE FINAL SOLUTIONS

[FLS]

Human nature is different in Aces High than it was in Warbirds?   Interesting theory.

Who's theory is that?

Pick up the ball. Play the ball.

[The Fugitive]

Human nature is different in Aces High than it was in Warbirds?   Interesting theory.

Pretty easy to see, everyone is ABLE to swap teams but few do. Those that DO swap, are treated poorly on the "new" team they have joined. Welcome to human nature.

If you have a small hard core group that goes out of their way to keep things even you'll see it, but very few are that "hard core" here. Heck look at the WWI arena during map resets or when Pops calls a time to play there. Rarely does it stay even in there.

[Vraciu]

Who's theory is that?

Pick up the ball. Play the ball.

I'm done with you and your baiting.   *plonk*

[Vraciu]

Pretty easy to see, everyone is ABLE to swap teams but few do. Those that DO swap, are treated poorly on the "new" team they have joined. Welcome to human nature.

If you have a small hard core group that goes out of their way to keep things even you'll see it, but very few are that "hard core" here. Heck look at the WWI arena during map resets or when Pops calls a time to play there. Rarely does it stay even in there.

Never happened in my experience.   But it goes back to my original point.   2 v 1 defeats the ENY any way when it is 30 + 30 vs 30.    60 vs 30 would be a whole other thing.

All this hand wringing over balance when we aren't balanced NOW.    I'd rather have two sides, total victory, and dynamic fronts than three sides with fronts that hardly move or fights way across the map from my country.   At least with two sides it's gonna' be a brawl all the time.

But again, this is a dead horse...   Dead.  Pulverized.  Buried.  I'm happy to see a bump in players since Steam came online.   I'm enjoying it.

[Arlo]

A major difference between WB and AH was nationality per side (making switching sides less likely if a player/squad is into, say, P-51s.

[The Fugitive]

Never happened in my experience.   But it goes back to my original point.   2 v 1 defeats the ENY any way when it is 30 + 30 vs 30.    60 vs 30 would be a whole other thing.

All this hand wringing over balance when we aren't balanced NOW.    I'd rather have two sides, total victory, and dynamic fronts than three sides with fronts that hardly move or fights way across the map from my country.   At least with two sides it's gonna' be a brawl all the time.

But again, this is a dead horse...   Dead.  Pulverized.  Buried.  I'm happy to see a bump in players since Steam came online.   I'm enjoying it.

There is no way to balance the side reliably AND keep the freedom of flying with your squad, or friends. 3 sides gives you more options and a more likely fights on more than one front.

The issue is not the number of teams, but the numbers of players. I just checked and the are only 130+ players on line on a late afternoon (eastern time). Old days it was easily 300+ and the issues of being ganged or not having and fights is moot.

Sure the Steam opening brought in a bunch of players, but how many have stayed? Hitech was impressed with the number of downloads ( was about more than 1 a minute I think they said in the first 24 hours). How many of those downloads turned into subscriptions? I know the new guys I have tried to help out when I was on, most love the game but have all kinds of simple issues. Mostly due to the crap games they have been playing requiring nothing more than a keyboard and a mouse.

Hopefully HTC can look objectively at the data and come up with a plan to keep the game rolling along and growing.  Numbers are what we need, not major changes to the game.

[DH367th]

You boys really do know how to beat a dead horse I will give you that.

[hgtonyvi]

You boys really do know how to beat a dead horse I will give you that.

dead horse?? BBQ in session lol...

[Vraciu]

A major difference between WB and AH was nationality per side (making switching sides less likely if a player/squad is into, say, P-51s.

 

Not exactly, because we had the AvA and then a Main.  I think the countries had colors that rotated.   Seems like they were never the same from map to map.  Could be a fuzzy memory though...

[Vraciu]

There is no way to balance the side reliably AND keep the freedom of flying with your squad, or friends. 3 sides gives you more options and a more likely fights on more than one front.

The issue is not the number of teams, but the numbers of players. I just checked and the are only 130+ players on line on a late afternoon (eastern time). Old days it was easily 300+ and the issues of being ganged or not having and fights is moot.

Sure the Steam opening brought in a bunch of players, but how many have stayed? Hitech was impressed with the number of downloads ( was about more than 1 a minute I think they said in the first 24 hours). How many of those downloads turned into subscriptions? I know the new guys I have tried to help out when I was on, most love the game but have all kinds of simple issues. Mostly due to the crap games they have been playing requiring nothing more than a keyboard and a mouse.

Hopefully HTC can look objectively at the data and come up with a plan to keep the game rolling along and growing.  Numbers are what we need, not major changes to the game.

I agree to a point.  The problem is that more teams dilute the player base.  This can be good when the arena is massively populated, but if they had done that when I was in WBs it would have been a disaster.   Two sides worked there with similar numbers to what we have now.

[Ack-Ack]

We balanced in Warbirds all the time.   ALL THE TIME.  It was never an issue.

That's not a true statement.  When I played WB, the same issues about side unbalancing were present in that game as well and people were complaining just as loudly then as they are now. 

[Vraciu]

That's not a true statement.  When I played WB, the same issues about side unbalancing were present in that game as well and people were complaining just as loudly then as they are now.

Nope.  Not while I was there.  It was never a problem.  People switched for balance all the time.  We'd announce it on country, <S>, and switch.   When things settled down we would switch back.  If it became a problem after I left well...

[Pongo]

" Old days it was easily 300+ and the issues of being ganged or not having and fights is moot."

If only.
The game is an open sand box war arena. HT has done likely dozens of things to the game in the last 17 years to try to address or lessen this fundamental issue with the "type" of game this is.  But human  nature is a hurricane. It will not be stopped. The guys on the big team have more fun, have more  success(crazy skill excepted) and feel more tough.

The fundamental strength of the game aside from its simulation and social focus is the big sand box arena where you can win by your efforts and team work. When you compare that at its best to any canned and "fair" 15 on 15 battle there is really no comparison. But it comes with a huge challenge to design that like I said, HTC has worked on for decades.  With some success. ELR is something, logistical weaknesses to the attack fields are something.  But human nature will not be stopped.
I am not saying that there is not some golden bullet that could fix the balance issue but keep the open world sand box soul of the game still there.
But I have not seen it, nor conceived of it. 
If you did force balance on teams, you would have to do it with whole clans at a time. Cause the social aspect of the game is critical. So you would be forcing a squad off the wining team because they were winning. Or something like that.
In effect making the "war" un-winnable.
A different game entirely.

[Lazerr]

That's not a true statement.  When I played WB, the same issues about side unbalancing were present in that game as well and people were complaining just as loudly then as they are now.

Did warbirds have ENY?  ?

[Lazerr]

Two countries is the only thing that will save this